Now, how about this one guy I'll never be able to remember - I think he was Mexican, his English was of the Babelfish dialect, and his particular fetish was for looney tunes characters, always three of them...

two having missionary sex in a closet or preferably in a coffin six feet under, and one that the lovers don't know about, happily jerking off in their general direction. He really liked the coffin variant of this.

Never mind how the watcher would know that the lovers were doing their thing in the small enclosed area, or how they got in the coffin in the first place.

I don't get why DA doesn't count stuff like this as porn. There's having someone come across your work and fapping to it, and then there's deliberately setting up a resource for other people to fap to. I don't get why this is different from pictures of someone touching their junk, especially the foot-licking and shit.

I totally get why. It would make their rules as to what is porn much more confusing and arbitrary. Currently they are pretty straight-forward and objective, if penetration, genital contact, or bodily fluids are obviously shown, it's porn. If they changed it to something more subjective like 'single theme for purpose of arousal', it would cause a lot more confusion since while it's obvious in a case like this, there's going to be a lot of personal feeling and opinion going into the decision for many other cases. They already don't remove obvious porn that doesn't explicitly show penetration, fluids, or masturbation.There's not really an easy, non-arbitrary way to make this stuff against the rules without also banning another artist's sheet of hand study-sketches or a close up of hands that has no fetishistic intention. As for the foot-licking, dA allows erotica, including licking and biting. Banning specifically feet would be a strangely specific rule. A smaller website might be able to have subjective arbitrary rules, but dA is just too large.

Technically yes, but I'm not even sure if the admins give a damn about stolen art anymore, judging by what I've heard. Unless it's the actual artist who complains about their work being stolen, no 1 curr.

Their FAQ on tracing seems...A bit weirdly open about it, implying that the actual artist has to file a DMCA thing (DMCA is a bit crappy anyway, I had someone use it to remove videogame screenshots I took of themselves being jackasses, wat. Wasn't on DA though).